Where do you get the claim that "hyperrational" atheists support eugenics and support happiness for the rich only? There are utilitarian options that include happiness for the masses, the proletariat, which involve maximising wellbeing for EVERYONE as far as possible. In fact, science shows that most people's baseline happiness doesn't increase once they go past a certain level of wealth (enough to be secure and not worry about debt). Only allowing the rich to procreate isn't a scientific, or an atheist belief at all.

Where do you get the claim that Sam Harris' solution to happiness is neoliberalism? If you actually read Waking Up or listen to his podcasts he talks about the importance of Buddhist concepts such as Great Compassion, learning to appreciate the "numinous" on a spiritual but not religious level, the importance of meditation, the importance of finding meaning in life etc.

You claim to be an atheist but that doesn't mean you aren't capable of strawmanning Sam Harris or "new atheism" in general. You make all these claims about him and his beliefs which are very warped representations of his actual beliefs.

As for sex, it may seem "foolish" to you, but why? What makes it foolish or humiliating? For many people it's neither. It can be ennobling if it's with someone you love. Might want to examine why you hold having sex in such contempt.